$ε_0$ affects electric field intensity, but $μ_0$ doesn't affect magnetic field intensity? I'll be honest: this question is actually a homework problem. I've spent the past hour going through Google and several textbooks trying to answer the question "Why does $ϵ_0$ affect electric field intensity but $μ_0$ does not affect the magnetic field intensity?" I don't understand much about electromagnetism, but I haven't found an explanation for this. From what I've seen, $μ_0$ seems to be inherently related to the magnetic field strength in the same way that $ϵ_0$ is related to the electric field strength.
Can anyone help me by providing a very general answer or by pointing me to a good resource? I don't want or expect anyone to do my homework for me, but a nudge in the right direction would be much appreciated!
 A: What's probably happening here is the following: The fundamental or microscopic fields $\mathbf{E}$ and $\mathbf{B}$ are technically called the electric field strength and the magnetic induction, while $\mathbf{D}$ and $\mathbf{H}$, their macroscopic counterparts, are called the electric displacement and the magnetic field, a quite weird nomenclature, since you would think $\mathbf{E}$ and $\mathbf{B}$ would be simply called the fields, but that's history for you.
In this context, saying that $\mu_0$ doesn't affect the magnetic field intensity would mean that it doesn't affect $\mathbf{H}$, in much the same way that $\epsilon_0$ doesn't affect the electric displacement, that is, $\mathbf{D}$. What $\mu_0$ does affect is the magnetic induction $\mathbf{B}$, which is often simply called the magnetic field.
A: The only thing I can see them going for is the fact that only two of $\epsilon_0$, $\mu_0$ and $c$ are independent, and typically, a modern view will fold $\epsilon_{0}$ into the definition of charge, and declare $c$ to be the fundamental constant used to transform space into time in special relativity, making $\mu_{0}$ a prediction of the theory.  
I couldn't tell you whether this is what your book is going for, though.
